Future-proofing public spheres

A philosophical disagreement between Jürgen Habermas and his supervisor Theodor Adorno at the Frankfurt School culminated in Habermas’s 1981 magnum opus: The Theory of Communicative Action. With its central premise that human action is fundamentally based on communication and language, his theory envisions a utopian ideal where human communication transcends boundaries of power, coercion, and inequality, creating opportunities for participants to learn from others and from themselves, leading to a truly inclusive and egalitarian public sphere.

Four decades later, media, communication and democracy academics continue to deliberate over the fragilities of the public spheres where citizens can engage, coordinate and shape political meaning, including at last week’s two-day workshop on ‘Future Proofing the Public Sphere’, organised by the Queensland University of Technology Digital Media Research Centre (DMRC) and the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. 
 
The presentations and panels explored the changing definition of the public sphere(s), the progressively blurring line between the ‘online’ and ‘offline’ world, and diminishing normative ideals about what makes a thriving public sphere. And what particularly engaged many of us was the focus on activating a dynamic interdisciplinary network of scholars, and pushing the boundaries of western-centric research norms that exclude broader discussions on networked publics in the Majority World as well as their changing ideas and ideals of democratic renewal. For instance, University of Melbourne’s Sofya Glazunova, whose research focuses on digital activism and anti-regime publics in the Russian context, questioned the sustainability of democratic public spheres under authoritarian regimes. On another panel, DMRC’s Katharina Esau raised a pressing concern about whether those who cannot directly participate in the process of activism or mobilisation are accurately represented in these movements, and what deliberative practices are needed to make sure democratic representation is occurring in all contexts.
 
Studying individual public spheres in isolation risks overlooking the interconnectedness of global issues and the potential for shared solutions. Digital authoritarianism, including internet shutdowns and censorship, may be an untreaded terrain for many in the west, but far-right extremism and polarisation are too well known to all publics globally. The future-proofing of digital public spheres will require more than just facilitating normatively desirable outcomes for western democracies, which rely heavily on striking bargains with big tech to 'allow' such spheres to thrive.

Ayesha Jehangir, CMT Postdoctoral Fellow